ThePhantom

I have been playing this Joker 3 several times over. I cannot get better than a draw every time. However, each time I play, I get more and more efficient in clearing a path to joker 3’s elements. I can truthfully say I have not put so much thought into trying to win a scenario as I have this one. It’s like LLF said, “One sniper can become a serious problem.” The bad guys seem to be in every house, on every corner, behind every wall, and hidden under the trees. You think you have control of the situation and suddenly there’s enemy contact to the front, flank, or rear. What I like most about this scenario is the hummer becomes a priceless ammo carrier and weapons platform. The Ma Deuce and the Mark 19 become highly effective weapons. The M240G machine gun teams become important assets to whatever squad they’re with. The SMAW makes the bad guys shiver. I have played CMSF since its initial release. I have played most if not every available scenario. Yet, I have never seen any of these systems being truly equal to their real life counter parts. However, in this scenario, they come to life. I cannot wait for your next scenarios LLF!

Abneo3sierra, thanks! That Fennek idea works great. They do have the launchers. It looks funny with six of them parked but it works. I like them over the wolf vehicle too. OK, no more panzer faust problem here.

It's just a joke to you all! My panzer grenadiers were embarrassed in front of a single BMP -3. I was furious. In fact, I forced each platoon to quick time back to the far corner of the map. They sat there, exhausted, for the duration of the scenario. I can't even look at them anymore! They're not panzer grenadiers, they're just panzer "guys" to me.... without their panzerfausts.

Please Battlefront, the panzergrenadiers need AT assets. I cannot wait another month for this fix. I played McEwan's Panzer Angriffe scenario and engaged BMP 3s with my infantry. They simply did not have a chance, it was pathetic and embarrassing. This is not a small issue, this is a huge issue. German infantry without panzerfausts is like Christmas trees without lights..... It should never happen.

Please Battlefront, the panzergrenadiers need AT assets. I cannot wait another month for this fix. I played McEwan's Panzer Angriffe scenario and engaged BMP 3s with my infantry. They simply did not have a chance and it was embarrassing. This is not a small issue, this is a huge issue.

Your comments are very helpful, jkobmadrid. Constructive criticism is what helps create the best scenarios. As far as Main Battle Tanks go, I like putting the blue side in some type of critical situation. In this scenario the blue player must confront enemy armor with TOW and javelin teams. Remember you are only facing a light armored reconnaissance company in the beginning (Slightly over strength with company and battalion assets (BMP/BRDM/T-62s). M1’s show one hour into the battle and perhaps that is too long for the Marines in the field. The thing is the blue side has four T-62s that first fifteen minutes while the red side has two (Three more just before 1 hour). So the armor balance sways to blue that first half of the game. Can the tanks be used to assist the Marines to gain that fire base? The challenging aspect of the game is up in the air. The red player does have more vehicles but the numbers are basically balanced. There is 14 T-72 (5 are T-62s) on the red side versus 3 M1s and 4 T-62s on blue. The infantry balance is almost equal with red at about 500 while blue is 460. Infantry fighting vehicles are a lot of BMPs for both sides. Red has a slight advantage with BMP 2s while blue has BMP 1cs. However, the blue player has the platoons of LAVs, AMTRAKS, TOW vehicles of variety, Javelin teams and close air support. Artillery is also equal with 60mm/80mm for blue and 120mm/80mm for red. Realistically, the red side initial force is not that strong. They have a heavy weapons platoon with a company of supporting infantry and light machine gun positions (and mines). The red’s reinforcement zone is protected by a blocking platoon that is not used in their defense of the hill (Back of the hill is in their kill zone). With that being said the blue force should be able to make some progress against this defensive force in the initial contact stage. Red reinforcements do come earlier than blues main force. I tried to design it so that the coalition force realizes that the SLA cannot get the job done on their own. Something you found out first hand jkobmadrid. However, on the one hour high tide mark the Marine assets should be there to create some mayhem. Red’s main counter attack force comes about the same time blue has reached its full potential. Both reinforcements are almost equal distance to the hill objective with red having a slight distance advantage. This is the climax stage of the scenario. In real time the blue force is challenged to destroy the opposing force quickly enough (Yet, it can be done). Turn based is another story. I found two hours to be too much time. I think the main point is that it is a game. There must be some difficulty in gaining the objective. A “real” situation would be the US air power knocking out every armor asset the Syrians have. The hill would be pummeled with 155mm until it resembled the moon (not one house would have a scratch) and then the infantry would clean up the unfortunate dumb enemy that was found. The next day the smarter enemy would come out of the houses, re-occupy the hill, and the US would have to do it again.

I tried to make the scenario with a coalition type feeling to it. Syrian blue force develops first and then the US Marine force becomes the main focus. My next one will be British with the famous SLA Syrians. Just need some comments on how you think the Cherry Point scenario is and I will go from there.

I have found turn based is much easier. You let time slip by in real time. I think that's were you get most of your time restraint problems (I have read some CMSF players have this issue). Turn based allows a much more controlled approach to your units on a wider scale. I play real time often. However, if I have difficulty or run into a real fight I go to turn based the next time. When I build a scenario I test both ways. Real time is often a rush against time. Turn based and I almost always finish with 10 minutes or more. You just must remember it is a game. With that, make it as difficult as possible. Play real time if you want a serious challenge. Play turn based if you want to watch the entire battle and always win.

Handihoc - You have not played Sense of Urgency? What I have found is my old scenarios that are baked are unusable with 1.11.... I will remake it if you haven't played it! I figured every one had a go at the original and they were done with it.

Hey Handihoc!!! I was waiting for your input. This scenario does indeed bring in the Pacific Theater, WW2. "Old Baldy" - "The Turkey Knob!!!" These were the areas that made up the Meat Grinder on Iwo Jima. How on earth you put two and two together is beyond me....? I made this scenario thinking of how the Japanese would have setup defensive positions (excluding caves and tunnels). I'm glad you like this one. Tell me how you finished it.

Great stuff, BlackMoria. You're right, my next one I will limit the mines. You didn't lose one armored vehicle? I've always lost at least two while testing the scenario. That sir, is impressive. I like the statement, "Syrian version of Pickett's charge." The poor bad guys walk into a serious wall of steel if you setup your defensive line properly. Reports like this make me want to do more scenarios. I'm glad you enjoyed this one. I have to say good job overcoming the obstacles and accomplishing the mission.

Hello Afreu, Great After Action. I’m glad you enjoyed that one. Did you really bring the Amtracs over to LZ Lima? I never thought of that… Too cool! I have to admit that scenario gets truly intense about 50 minutes into the game. I sort of agree about the mines. If a Marine squad identifies a mine area during an assault they will drop to the ground and start picking through it with a bayonet (I don’t know about today. However, in the early nineties that was standard procedure). I have noticed the slow command allows the unit to advance over the area. I do understand reoccurring mine casualties can be extremely frustrating. So deleting them is understandable. The other side of the coin is mines are real and extremely effective. Any defending force that can call itself a military (of sorts) will use mines. I do wish there were more effective ways of combating mines in CMSF. As it stands right now, you have to go around or move slowly through them. Maybe, once the mine field has been identified that mine hex should be ineffective. Hello Cabal23, Yes, Lima must block, did you really try to go into the magical forest of doom? My god that must have been brutal!!! Please try it again – That to me means it’s a great scenario if someone says it is replay able – I’ve accomplished my task, thanks man.

"Damn what a battle!" Sounds good, Secondbrooks. You played the turn based type I assume. I tried to keep the red side up for the full 1 hour and thirty minutes in turn based. It just seems they fall apart at the end. However, that first hour is a lot of fun. I think with turn based you don't waste anytime. Your men move with coordination and work more efficiently. With real time you waste a lot of time. Minutes click away and your forces miss opportunities. Sure glad you liked it.

The scenario is based on a sweep that took place with the 1rst Marine Division on the road to Baghdad. Marine armor went up the road first and then the infantry had to sweep the Iraqi ambush sites. On one occasion the 7th Marine Regiment stumbled on a well trained insurgent training facility. Needless to say things got a little crazy. Of course I had to add two companies of Syrian mechanized forces to heat things up. A great book to read (One of my favorites!!) is The March Up: Taking Baghdad with the 1rst Marine Division by retired Marine Generals Bing West and Ray Smith. These jokers went along with the armor in a civilian vehicle - because they thought they would be safer. The most interesting part of the book is the stories of the grunts who did the dirty work, cleaning out the bad guys positions. Several of the locations the Marine companies encountered had unknown enemy strength. Yet, the Marines cleaned out each and every one. Most of the time they were seriously outnumbered and there was no armor available - The armor was already in Baghdad. This was grunt against pajama man and it was crazy and bloody.

Glad you liked it FightingSeabee. A tactical defeat - Good, that means it's re-playable. Did you play it in real time? Big difference with real time and turn based. Real time is a lot harder.

New scenario - On CMMODS.... The 1rst Marine division is tasked to begin Operation Clean Sweep. The time has come to eliminate the enemy harassment positions along highway 5m. Intel reports a hidden enemy training facility south of the highway. A disabled M1 marks the ambush location. We also need that vehicle recovered. This is a sweep operation the 3rd battalion 7th Marine regiment is to push Kilo Company south from the highway to the enemy training center. A blocking force of Lima Company will catch the withdrawing enemy force at Medinna Ridge. Talk to me - Tell me what you think.

Does anyone remember how to keep permanent commander names in a scenario? I remember someone had figured it out but I can't find the thread.

There's another little dog syndrome. Ruff, ruff, rrrrruff ruff. I can't wait for the Britts module. The Revolution 2 (This time it's in England), coming soon.

You've got to be kidding. Our British friendly forces with less than 8 percent of the entire coalition can stand up better than the American forces? Why doesn't the British put their numbers involved a little higher? Oh I forgot, they are pulling out the majority of troops in Iraq by May of this year. How many are in Afghanistan? 5500 maybe.... Please, it’s like a small dog syndrome. The small dog thinks they're the biggest toughest animal on the block. Yet, when the real big dog comes out, they just follow right behind them. Your people are part of the events and have been since 2003. I’m proud of the fact that the United States and the United Kingdom worked together to beat the bad guys. However just remember, before you start trash talking American forces, it took your supper troopers forever and a day to take Basra. Give America a break. You’re either with them or against them. Read this article……… http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4461023.ece Now bring up the subject again of who stands up to fight. You better pray to your God that your country’s always on America’s side .

Very interesting post, Paper Tiger. I do agree with the experience settings. However, Webwing did update his Red Pepper scenario to 1.1 and added the Marine Corps essentials. Hummers, a cobra, 81mm mortar section and the Leathernecks experience to mostly veteran. He even moved the reinforcement area away from the LOS of the main highway. I beat the hell out of the bad guys and I loved it! However, the crazy thing is..... I actually enjoy his original scenario more. In his original version the Marines are set at regular and have limited resupply. The final reinforcement group arrives on trucks in the line of fire down the main highway road. There are also a couple of BMP 3’s throwing 100mm rounds in the vicinity. To make matters even more desperate there is limited mortars and no cobra gunship support!!! Every aspect of the scenario is an extreme challenge. To wrap this up I feel it is a game. The more challenging the scenario is the better the game. If it’s so difficult that I have to write on the forum and vent my feelings (I’m not a forum fan) then Wow what a game.

Paper Tiger, I do know with the Marines on veteran, I was able to achieve a solid victory. This was done on Webwing’s original scenario. So I can continue the way I like to play if I have my veteran Marines. You are right the experience is a huge factor in how well the units react under fire. However, my "Run for your life" issue started when I sent a platoon of Marines to the fourth trench on Red Pepper scenario. They got in the trench but decided to run in the other direction down the hill. There was certainly no heavy small arms fire...... nothing to force a withdrawal. This upset me very much. Never have I seen my hard dogs running in the other direction with, what I assumed, was a marginal threat ahead of them. I was shocked in fact. Then on my third or fourth time I played. I rushed a scout sniper unit to the wood line in the North East of the map. At its OP, I saw what was creating the withdrawal. A massive group of enemy infantry... Perhaps a company plus was flanking my forward position Marine platoons. These Marines on their own initiative were running back to prepare a better defensive position. I, as the overall self appointed commander and chief, failed to realize they were reacting on their own to the situation. I now understand the error of my ways. It is a lesson well learned. Webwing rushes two powerful infantry groups on both flanks opposite the player’s center. His overall mission is to give the AI some life and the groups advance rather quickly. Those who decide to "Hold the line" will be able to block the attacking forces (But you have a high chance of a simple draw victory). Those who attempt to counter attack and then advance had better maintain a solid force into the objective. Webwing has also updated his scenario and gives more supporting elements for the more aggressive player..... Thank you, Webwing. All in all, there has been some tweaking of infantry actions... One of which is your unit will only advance with contact if they are equal to or superior in numbers (or firepower) to the enemy. If they are not.... They will not advance but run back to a defensive position.

Pandur, You’re missing the point. Granted, I could take my time and slowly push across the map. If I had done that I would not have noticed the “Run for your life” withdrawal too. However, I don’t play to draw. A draw is a loss if you’re the US player anyway. The Marine Corps is designed to assault the enemy and destroy them by firepower and maneuver. There is no taking your time. If you use your forces more aggressively, you will notice a change in their frontline performance quickly. However, please do not think I’m blaming anything. I enjoy the game. I simply wanted to know if anybody else noticed the “Run for your life.” By the way – The “Run for your life” phrase I keep using is for laughs. It really is a “Run to better cover.” When I first wrote my thread I felt my Marines were running away. No Marine Corps platoon is going to run from a fight. Especially since I noticed there was limited small arms fire in the area. Something was different, plain and simple. What I discovered and what was confirmed in these threads is if your forward elements come In contact with a numerically superior force, there is a real good chance those forward elements will disengage contact and withdrawal to positions behind them. This is new to 1.11 version and it is noticeable if you are accustomed to advancing your forces rather than allowing the enemy to come to you.

I agree Webwing and Meach, I noticed this while I was playing Red Pepper. I had a scout sniper team view the rush of bad guys north of my two Marine platoons. The rush of bad guys were not actually advancing towards the Marines position but to their right flank (heading South East). I watched one Marine squad after another squad withdrawal down the hill. They were receiving light small arms fire but nothing to force a withdrawal. Adding to my discovery, I countered the enemy advancing force with a Marine platoon and several machine gun teams. As the enemy approached my blocking force I noticed the enemy reacting in about the same way. They were attacking piecemeal across the grassy field on the East side of the map. As each enemy squad entered my kill zone they would take fire and then run as quickly as possible in the other direction. Realistic, you bet. Both my Marine platoons and the bad guys were in bad positions. Not only did they realize they were outnumbered they felt the need to find a better location. I was attempting to smash through the enemy through its center. My guys didn't like the plan all that much. The enemy was trying to flank my force by running two companies around my forward position. They realized they had entered a kill zone and, "Ran for their lives" in the other direction. All Battlefront has done is make it more difficult to kill the bad guys…. It's just not as simple as it once was. If you don't realize how big your opposing force is your men will remind you. Every time you force them forward they'll run right back! They will all have that same expressionless look on their face too, that makes it even more frustrating.

I know now why they run…… In Webwing’s Red Pepper scenario I advance two platoons of hard charging Marines towards the center of the map. There are four trench lines going up a hill. I call it the amphitheater. My first platoon occupies the first three trenches. My second platoon passes them to the fourth and final trench. Here’s the kicker….. The second platoon (runs for their lives) withdraws back down the hill. Why? Is it because they are being overwhelmed by mass firepower?…. No. Is it because I have madly rushed them forward with little regard for their lives? … No. What’s really going on is a flippin battalion of enemy reinforcements are near the area. I do believe my digital amigos are running to safety because of this. I bet there is a calculation of, “How many enemies are in the unit’s vicinity.” This is one of the determining factors in, “The run for your life.” Don’t get me wrong – I like it. I’ll just have to start acting more army style then Marine….. That’s ok.

cmfan, it's not tasking a fire team it is tasking a full rifle company. Play Red Pepper by Webring - You will see it happen often enough. Paper Tiger, you are correct it is the experience of the Marines that makes the difference. I felt changing Webring's settings was cheating but it had to be done. I couldn't win with them as regular. With veteran Marines I achieved a solid victory. However, my ego is gone, I'm no longer the computer general I thought I was.